CHAPTER 8
VOTER ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION

This chapter highlights the range of views and recommendations that
were made to the Committee regarding the principles of engagement and
accessibility set out in the Committee’s mandate:

2)
Engagement: that the proposed measure would encourage voting and
participation in the democratic process, foster greater civility and
collaboration in politics, enhance social cohesion and offer opportunities for
inclusion of underrepresented groups in the political process;

3)
Accessibility and inclusiveness: that the proposed measure would avoid
undue complexity in the voting process, while respecting the other principles,
and that it would support access by all eligible voters regardless of physical
or social condition;[456]

Specifically, this chapter summarizes the suggestions made to the
Committee regarding improving civic education, lowering the voting age, making
voting more accessible, and considering alternative voting days.

The Committee heard witnesses from across the country who suggested
that improving civic education would “encourage voting and participation in the
democratic process.” [457] Witnesses argued that civic education would lead to higher voter turnout, a
more informed electorate, and even a more legitimate government. Suggestions
made by witnesses included calls for mandatory civics courses in high schools,[458] and a national public education campaign on Canada’s democratic system. As
well, various local First Nation leaders who addressed the Committee at the
site visit to Tsartlip First Nation on Vancouver Island spoke about the need
for education and engagement strategies targeted to Indigenous Canadians to
increase voter turnout and participation.

Many witnesses and open mic participants noted that civic
engagement is closely linked to education, and as such education programs are
essential to increasing youth engagement in public and democratic life. For
example, Kuthula Matshazi, councillor for the town of Iqaluit, stated:

I think that all governments, regardless of
whether they are Liberal, Conservative, or NDP, want to engage as many people
as they possibly can. In taking a strategic approach to this issue, one of the
ways that you can tackle it is by looking at youth education. If we can help
people when they are still young and then make them understand why they should
participate in politics and in political processes, by the time they get to be
18 years old, they will fully understand their civic duties. They will fully
understand what's in it for them, and then they will be able to participate in
the system.[459]

Various experts agreed that starting civic education early is an
investment in the future of Canadian democracy. It was argued that youth civic
education would create a more informed and engaged electorate and thus a more
legitimate government. As Maryantonnett Flumian expressed:

Most importantly, because an increase in voter
turnout can equate to government's legitimacy, methods to improve accessibility
are but one of the viable alternatives. I'm talking specifically about civic
education. Parliament has a duty to ensure that its citizens understand the
importance of their participation in strengthening the principles of sound
public governance. With a civic education strategy that starts by targeting
grade schools and high schools, we can ensure that there are more first-time
voters, regardless of the voting system we choose, and that many more will
become voters for a lifetime, continuing to support the ongoing foundation of
democratic governance.[460]

As well, some witnesses posited that low voter turnout was in part
related to a lack of access to suitable resources informing voters of the
electoral process. Dominic Vézina of the Institut du Nouveau Monde advocated
for a mandatory civics course at the high school level:

Civic education is the surest way to get young
people interested in politics. One of the main reasons young people do not vote
is that they do not understand how politics affect them personally. A
compulsory civics course should be given in Grade 9, while school is still
compulsory, so that it is taught to everyone.[461]

Mr. Vézina noted that currently, young
Canadians are not sufficiently politically informed to feel the need or desire
to engage in the political process or to exercise their right to vote when they
come of age.

Youth may become more invested in the democratic process through
interactive experiences. Mock parliaments are one example of an interactive
educational tool. Mr. Vézina suggested that “mock voting should be available to
all students for each election.”[462] This
idea was echoed by Peter Russell from the University of Toronto:

[W]hat they (the
witnesses’ colleagues Paul Howe, University of New Brunswick, and Henry Milner,
Université de Montréal) are really coming up with is improving how schools
handle the teaching of politics. If you read their books, it isn’t just a
matter of teaching; it’s the type of teaching. It should be interactive and not
just having the teacher saying, here’s what Parliament does. It should be very
creative and interactive, having mock parliaments and so on.[463]

In his testimony, Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand added that
civic education was “the most important influencer” of young Canadians’ voting
habits.[464] This statement was echoed throughout the Committee’s study. Several witnesses
agreed that governments at the provincial and federal levels should work
together to come up with a civic education course or program that should be
implemented in high schools across the country. Sue Duguay of
the Fédération des jeunes francophones du Nouveau-Brunswick stated:

In addition … our members' proposal asks … for the
addition of mandatory civic education courses to the school curriculum. These
courses are extremely important in creating generations of voters with a full
understanding of the electoral system. It is therefore important that the
federal government, with its provincial counterparts, provide adequate civic
education in the classroom.[465]

Speaking in Manitoba, Gina Smoke observed that information on the
electoral process and the Canadian democratic system can be especially
difficult to access for youth in marginalized communities such as some
Indigenous communities:

I think everybody should know why it’s important
to vote. I don’t know why we don’t have it in our school systems, because it’s
something that we all have to do when we become old enough to vote. On the
reserves we don’t talk about it. Why would we talk about it, because our vote
doesn’t count. It’s just been ingrained in people for years.… There are still a
lot of issues around the residential schools that make it somewhat difficult to
know why being involved in politics is important.[466]

The need to use education
as a tool to increase democratic engagement was raised by a number of local
First Nations leaders who spoke with the Committee at a site visit to Tsartlip
First Nation on Vancouver Island.[467] For example, Tsawout First Nation
Band Council member Mavis Underwood spoke about the need to educate young
people about how and why to vote. She suggested that community-based dialogue
would be a way to proceed. Tsawout First Nation Chief Harvey Underwood
explained that since First Nations only obtained the right to vote in the
1960s, it is still relatively new to the community, and education is necessary.
He also suggested that the education ought to be mutual, in that politicians
should also work to better understand First Nations’ concerns. Chief Tanya
Jimmy (Jones) of Tseycum First Nation recommended using mentors to educate
about the current electoral process and any proposed reforms. Finally, Tsartlip
Chief Don Tom spoke about the success of a joint initiative between Elections
Canada, the Assembly of First Nations (AFN), and provincial First Nations
leadership to educate, engage, and get out the vote for the October 2015
federal election.

A number of witnesses advocated for increased civic education for
the general public, and especially around any proposed electoral system
reforms. For example,
Jane Hilderman from Samara Canada suggested the following:

First, there needs to be strengthened public
education about Canada's democratic system, often called civic education or
civic literacy. I think this is especially important if the electoral system
changes. At present, citizenship education largely remains the purview of
provincial education curricula and is typically incorporated into high school
education programs. This is very helpful, but it isn't sufficient. Efforts are
needed to reinforce civic knowledge through adulthood as well as during the
integration of newcomers into Canada's public life. However, there are very few
resources for nationwide efforts in Canada in civic education, nor is it clear
who among government departments or agencies should be responsible for
delivering on this goal.[468]

Ms. Hilderman highlighted the lack of resources for Canadians who
are not in a formal setting (such as a school) to become informed about
Canada’s democratic system. She suggested that this is an accessibility issue
that governments at the provincial
and federal levels as well as non-government organizations, could help to
remedy by working collaboratively. J.P. Lewis from the University of
New-Brunswick emphasized the importance of this collaboration:

While considering the role of electoral management
bodies in Canada in civic education, it should be clearly noted that the
majority of civic education policies and programs undertaken by electoral
management bodies are often in partnership with other policy actors. Groups
such as CIVIX, Samara, and Apathy is Boring have all been prominent in
spreading the message of combatting voter apathy.[469]

The suggestion to lower the voting age to 16 was raised on numerous
occasions by various witnesses throughout the Committee’s study. Many argued
that it would increase voter turnout and encourage youth voters to participate
in the democratic process and to remain active voters throughout their life.

The 2015 federal election saw the highest rate of voter turnout for
electors aged
18-24 since Elections Canada began presenting demographic data on turnout (in
2004). Turnout for this age group jumped from 38.8% in 2011 to 57.1% in 2015.[470]

Following the 2011 general election, Elections Canada published a
working paper entitled Youth Electoral Engagement in Canada, by André
Blais and Peter Loewen, who both appeared as witnesses before the Committee.
This study, which explored youth electoral engagement in Canada, looked at a
variety of socio-demographic factors that may affect voting patterns. It
identified having an interest and an understanding of political issues had a
significant effect on youth voting behaviour.[471]

Andy O’Neill, Head of the
Electoral Commission in Scotland, discussed Scotland’s recent experience with
lowering the voting age to 16 for the 2014 Scottish referendum on independence.
Mr. O’Neill observed the following regarding 16 and 17 year old Scottish
voters: “It was a very engaged electorate. There were thought to be well over
90% of 16 and 17-year-olds registered, and very high levels of participation in
terms of voting.”[472]

The May 2016 Scottish Parliament election was the first where 16
and 17 year olds were allowed to vote. According to the Electoral Commission:

Approximately 80,000 of them registered to vote at
the election and this age group had high levels of awareness and knowledge
about the registration process. This is encouraging, but it remains the case
that young people are much less likely to report having voted than
older voters.[473]

The success of the Scottish experience was cited as an example in
favour of lowering the voting age by witnesses who appeared before the
Committee.

Many of the witnesses who supported lowering the voting age connected
to the need for stronger civics education. It was also suggested that it would
raise voter turnout in future elections. As explained by Victor Tootoo, who
appeared before the Committee in Iqaluit:

If you lower the voting age to 16, you are going
to see a higher voter turnout in terms of percentage from that cohort of the
population, that particular demographic, and because of their instant access to
education, and education regarding our electoral system, you'll have more
informed voters.[474]

Others added that by combining civics education and the right to
vote, young Canadians would feel more involved in the democratic process and be
better equipped to apply what they learn in school.[475] In its brief, the Fédération de la jeunesse canadienne-française recommended
both lowering the voting age to 16 and having the Government of Canada
collaborate with its provincial and territorial partners to institute civics
education measures to better prepare young voters for their first experience as
electors.[476]

Another argument raised in favour of extending the franchise to 16
and 17 year olds is that those youths would be more likely to continue voting
if they started early.
Sue Duguay, president of the Fédération des jeunes
francophones du Nouveau Brunswick, explained:

Studies tend to
demonstrate that once people vote, they will be inclined to continue to do so
all their lives. Because of this, 16-year-olds, still in the school system and
mostly living at home, would be in a situation that would encourage them to
vote, especially for the
first time.[477]

Others stated that
voting for the first time was a “civic rite of passage”[478] that ought to be celebrated. It was also claimed that lowering the voting age
could lead to more stable long-term policies. In his brief, Chris Maxwell
stated that “if we gave them the power to meaningfully express that concern it
would cause governments to have longer term policy stability (or at least
stability in long term policies).”[479]

The third principle set out in the Committee’s mandate called upon
the Committee to consider how any electoral reform proposals could promote
“accessibility and inclusiveness” and “support access by all eligible voters
regardless of physical or social condition.”

The Committee heard from witnesses representing a number of
communities who continue to encounter barriers when it comes to casting their
ballot.[480] Individuals and groups representing students, senior citizens, Indigenous
peoples, and people with disabilities highlighted the various challenges faced
casting their ballot and making their voices heard.

Young Canadians – specifically students – encounter barriers to
casting their ballot. Many students move away from home to pursue
post-secondary education and are thus faced with the challenge of casting a
vote (often for the first time) in an unfamiliar environment. Sue Duguay raised
this issue in relation to mandatory voting:

I find the idea quite interesting. However, I
think that, if voting becomes mandatory, it will have to be accessible as well.
It’s all very well to want everyone to vote, but it’s not easy to do so for the
most disadvantaged and the young people you talked about. As I mentioned, some
are not in their home region for the vote.[481]

Ms. Duguay argued that it is important to recognize the barriers
young Canadians encounter when trying to exercise their right to vote and the
importance of making the process fully accessible.

Maryantonett Flumian offered a possible solution to the barrier
described by
Ms. Duguay, a “vote-anywhere” policy:

We might have a vote-anywhere policy that would
facilitate the exercise of the franchise, notably by students who leave their
permanent place of residence to attend college or university just around
election time, if we stick to the current cycle. People could vote wherever
they were on polling day, rather than having to return to their place of
registration or having to change their registration to their new residence in
order to be able to vote on polling day.[482]

Keith Archer, Chief Electoral Officer of British Columbia, echoed
Ms. Flumian’s suggestion as a way to improve accessibility to the polls:

I think there's a lot we can do to increase the
accessibility of the ballot. One of the things that's in place in provincial
elections here in British Columbia which is not available at the federal level
is the ability of voters to attend any voting place to cast their ballot. If
you live in Prince George and are visiting Vancouver during the election
period, you can find a voting place in Vancouver and cast your ballot there if
you wish.[483]

As well, Fred-William Mireault, who appeared as a representative of
the Regroupement des étudiants et étudiantes du Cégep de Lanaudière,encouraged
the Committee to install voting booths in places that are highly accessible to
students (such as university and college campuses) as another way to improve
the accessibility to the voting process:

We are in favour of voting on university and
college campuses. Provincially, in the last election, Quebec's Chief Electoral
Officer allowed that kind of voting for the first time.
The effect was excellent; the turnout rate for young people and students went
up. I did not talk about it earlier, but it certainly would be helpful to
encourage polling stations on college and university campuses, even in schools
providing professional diploma courses to mature students.[484]

Senior citizens make up a significant percentage of the population[485] and also face challenges when the time comes to cast their ballot. Danielle
Perreault of the Fédération de l’âge d’Or du Québec (FADOQ) discussed some of
the barriers that prevent senior citizens from exercising their democratic
right to vote:

One of the things we
want to stress is the importance of the voter information card. Seniors
actually often no longer have an ID card as such—in other words, their photo no
longer appears on their health card. In addition, many seniors no longer have a
driver's license. It is difficult for them to properly identify themselves.

Those people should have a voter information card. I think that it
exists, but it is not well-known or used. That could be a democratic way to
encourage more people, especially seniors, to vote, even though seniors tend to
be the ones who vote the most, as we know. However, the fact remains that some
of them may be hindered by the difficulty of identifying themselves.

Seniors often sell their house to go live in residence, and having to
travel in order to vote can be very complicated. Establishing polling stations
in residences could be a worthwhile solution.[486]

Let me go back to access and to the possibility of
having polling stations close to where people live. Students could vote on
campus. That is done in certain places. Why could senior citizens not vote in
their environment? This would probably encourage more people to vote and to be
more concerned with their democracy.[487]

Ms. Perreault argued that making voting more accessible would
contribute to a more politically active and engaged spirit among senior
citizens.

Numerous witnesses spoke of the need to improve the accessibility
of the vote for Indigenous Canadians. For example, Gina Smoke stated:

I think they need to make it much easier for the [A]boriginal communities, especially the
northern ones; it's way harder for them to get out to vote. Why do we have to
make it so complicated? We know who they are in these communities. Why do we
have to come up with all these...? There are a lot of elders who can't speak
English or read English. They don't drive, so why would they have a driver's
licence? It's the same even in the community I grew up in, and it's not that
far from here. I just think there has to be a better way, and we all need to
work together to make it happen.[488]

France Robertson of the Centre d’amitié autochtone de Lanaudière
provided specific examples of solutions to some of the barriers alluded to by
Ms. Smoke:

First of all, the elector's card is a challenge in
itself for us. Why can't people simply show up with a
piece of ID? For Aboriginal families, it would be a lot
easier. And as I mentioned earlier, friendship centres are non-partisan
organizations. Since it's important to attract [I]ndigenous families, why not create polling stations in friendship
centres? Since they are non-partisan organizations, they are neutral places. I
think it's an interesting idea. It would make it possible to bring out more [I]ndigenous persons, and they could
exercise their right
to vote.[489]

As well, language may be a barrier to some people. As Ms. Smoke and
Ms. Robertson mentioned, some Indigenous Canadians do not speak either English
or French:

The fact that things take place in French, then,
is a reason they don't go to a polling place. An instruction, such as telling
someone to go to a certain station and to bring a card, is something
commonplace for you, but for them, it's complicated. If someone could explain
the procedure in Atikamekw, it would be much easier for them.[490]

In his testimony to the Committee Marc Mayrand spoke of the 3.5
million Canadians living with disabilities and how Internet voting could be one
tool to enable them to vote secretly and independently.[491] Carl Sosa of the Council for Canadians with Disabilities outlined some of the
barriers faced by Canadians with disabilities:

Voting is a right that is exercised by millions of
Canadians, but persons with disabilities encounter many barriers when it comes to
participating in the political process. Some of the barriers we face include
accessing identification, especially if you live in poverty and have a fixed
income. That can be a major barrier to participation.… Those who are vision
impaired also face significant obstacles in the voting process, as they are
unable to verify who they have voted for independently.… Another issue is
access to polling stations. It is absolutely essential that efforts are made to
ensure that voting is accessible to every Canadian over the age of 18.[492]

Reaching polling stations in order to cast a ballot is especially
challenging for people with mobility issues. This was highlighted as being a
serious problem particularly in Nunavut, as Victor Tootoo pointed out to the
Committee:

It seems these days that elections in Nunavut
never happen on a warm summer day—I can't recall that ever being the case—when
it is easiest for people with disabilities to go somewhere. You've been outside
here in Iqaluit today and you've seen how slippery it is. Imagine you are in a
wheelchair and you're trying to get to a polling station in December in
Nunavut, and this is Iqaluit. This is the capital of our territory. This is the
best our territory has to offer for people with disabilities.… Therefore, making
it easier for a person to vote in Nunavut would increase voter turnout.[493]

In testimony and submissions, various members of the public
encouraged the Committee to recommend that various options be considered to
facilitate voting for Canadians with disabilities. For example, Scott Allardyce
of the Canadian Disability Alliance suggested an “accessibility ombudsman” be
established at Elections Canada to help address some of the challenges faced by
individuals with disabilities:

The most important
thing is that we believe that Elections Canada should establish an
accessibility ombudsman, so that when people with disabilities have difficulty
in voting or difficulty at the polling place, there is a specific contact they
can reach out to at Elections Canada to say, “Here are the problems and I
couldn't vote” or “I felt uncomfortable in voting”.[494]

A number of witnesses also spoke to the traditionally low
engagement of Canadians living in low-income circimstances in the electoral
process. As noted by
Ruth Dassonneville, “The political science literature is quite clear that the
less well-off are less likely to turn out to vote.”[495] Carlos Sosa echoed that observation, stating that “[t]ypically, those who live
in more affluent areas tend to vote more than those who are in poverty.”[496] He added that a major barrier to participation by low-income Canadians is
accessing the proper identification and getting to a polling station,
particularly for those living on fixed incomes.[497] He
stated:

I think what we need to be dealing with here are
the issues of poverty. Once we deal with those issues, I think people will get
out and vote. The fact of the matter is that we also have to be dealing
with—I'll reiterate—the barriers just to get to the voting station. It's about
access to Handi-Transit. It's about the cost to get ID. It's about the
accessibility of the voting station.[498]

Franco Buscemi outlined the particularly difficult circumstances
faced by Canadians living in poverty in Iqaluit. He told the Committee:

The reason I bring up things like overcrowded
housing, poverty, and abuse is that if you're not sure where you're sleeping,
or if you're sleeping in shifts, and if you're not sure what your next meal is
going to be or when it's going to be, and if you're not sure when the next time
you're going to be sexually abused or physically abused will be, who really
cares when the next election is?[499]

One suggestion raised by witnesses to improve accessibility and
engagement would be to add more opportunities for voters to cast a ballot.
Witnesses presented several suggestions such as voting on weekends and/or
creating an Election Day holiday.

The Committee heard testimony that moving Election Day to the
weekend would improve voter turnout. For example, Patrice Dutil recommended
voting on Sundays:

[V]oting on Sunday,
which is a typical practice in Europe. Give people a day off to vote. Vote on a
Sunday when most people are not at work, dealing with kids, dealing with
school, taking them to lessons, doing all the things that a normal family does
during the week. Give them a chance to go vote.[500]

Mr. Dutil’s suggestion was echoed by a number of witnesses. Paul
Thomas recommended Sunday voting along with a number of other “operational”
improvements
“to make the whole experience more convenient, more accessible and so on.”[501] He added:

[A]t the level of Elections Canada, we can
facilitate voting with weekend voting and even Sunday voting. Some people may
not like that, but other people might take advantage of it. Also, we could have
free registration of young people and automation at the polls.[502]

Ruth Dassonneville added that: “Research tends to show that turnout
rates are a bit higher on weekends than they are during the week.”[503]

Other witnesses suggested making Election Day a national holiday
(as is the case in some other jurisdictions). Some individuals suggested that
having a voting holiday would not only improve accessibility and increase voter
turnout, but would also create a sense of community among voters and would add
a sense of excitement to the ritual of casting a ballot.

David Wasylciw from OpenNWT, strongly advocated for a voting
holiday: “I am a big fan of the voting holiday, making election day a really
big event and having Elections Canada-driven parties or whatever else.”[504] Some members of the public echoed Mr. Wasylciw’s enthusiasm:

Having said that, participation is a problem too
on election day, because people are too busy, they say. Well, if they're too
busy, what we can do is have election day as a holiday. Why can't we do that?
We have Labour Day. We have Family Day. We have this day and that day. Why not
an election day holiday?[505]

Finally, Fred Bild from Montreal proposed that a voting holiday should
include having polls open for 24 hours across the country:

There is a way to resolve … the issue of the time
difference across the country. We select one holiday for the entire country,
and polling stations will be open for 24 hours across the country. In this way,
no one will have an advantage, and all results will come in at the
same time.[506]

The Committee recommends that any electoral reform seek to enhance
the likelihood of improving voter turnout and to increase the possibilities for
historically disenfranchised and underrepresented groups (i.e. women, persons
with disabilities, Indigenous peoples, visible minorities, youth, and Canadians
of lower economic means) to be elected. [Note that this recommendation applies
to both Chapter 7 and Chapter 8]

Recommendation 9

The Committee recommends that, working with the provinces and
territories, the Government explore ways in which youth under 18 years of age
could be registered in the National Register of Electors, preferably through
the school system, up to two years in advance of reaching voting age.

Recommendation 10

The Committee recommends that the Government accord Elections
Canada the additional mandate, and necessary resources, to encourage greater
voter participation, including through initiatives such as Civix’s Student
Vote, and by better raising awareness among Canadians of existing options to
vote prior to Election Day (voting at an advance poll, voting by mail, voting
at any Elections Canada office).

[456] Extract
from House of Commons,Journals, 1st Session, 42nd Parliament, 7 June 2016.

[467] Indeed,
education was a prominent theme of the site visit. Tsartlip First Nation houses ȽÁU,
WELṈEW̱ Tribal School, which serves the Saanich People on
four reserves (Tsartlip, Pauquachin, Tseycum, and Tsawout) and surrounding
communities. The school offers a high quality local language (locally developed
SENCOTEN) and culture curriculum to enable Saanich children to learn about
their history and “find a clear vision of their future”.

[475] Teresa
Legrand, “Brief,” Submitted
Brief, October 26 2016: “Young people study Civics in Grade 10 in
Ontario.
To many of them it seems very remote – something they can’t participate in, so
it doesn’t hold their interest.
I believe that youth voter turnout would improve overall if the habit can be instilled
during the high-school years, and that the Civics curriculum would seem more
relevant to those required to study it.”

[476] Fédération de la jeunesse canadienne-française, “Lowering
the Voting Age to 16: A Priority for Improving the Electoral System,” Submitted Brief, October 18 2016.